pinkjellybeans
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 97 Likes: 254
inherit
1360
0
Sept 21, 2017 2:55:08 GMT
254
pinkjellybeans
97
Aug 30, 2016 14:16:12 GMT
August 2016
jellybeans
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pinkjellybeans on Sept 28, 2017 20:19:30 GMT
I do kind of wish we could go back to our PC being a bit more free with their sexuality. Sleeping with more than one party member, having more optional encounters outside of our core circle. The Warden could bang half of Fereldan. Only person the Inquisitor can sleep with outside of the LI's is the Dowager to help convince her to participate in Josie's plan to elevate that noble family. Part of why I think that the Inquisitor's just too clean of a character. Can't have the Herald of Andraste step foot in a brothel. I expect brothels to make a comeback in DA4. I mean, I can see why we couldn't visit them in DAI, it sort of made sense, but that's why I really want the protagonist in DA4 to be a nobody, someone who isn't worshiped by everyone and expected to behave. I also hope we will get more chances of testing the waters before committing to a permanent relationship. In MEA you can even have casual sex without committing. You can kiss people without being on an exclusive relationship too. Let my character have some fun, Bioware!
|
|
inherit
2703
0
2,011
Lazarillo
1,025
January 2017
lazarillo
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, SWTOR
|
Post by Lazarillo on Sept 28, 2017 20:32:16 GMT
How many do you think we'd have? Will they scale it back and we're going to end up with, say 6 permanent companions? Will there be romanceable/befriended/plot-important NPCs who are otherwise not our companions, like advisers or characters like Reyes in MEA? Depends a little on how the game is presented. 6 felt like too few in DA2, but was plenty in Awakening. 9 seems like more than enough assuming the game went for a balanced party (but they don't necessarily have to...Origins didn't). That's also with the caveat that I don't think we need a whole bunch of "advisors" and other minor non-party NPCs bloating the cast. 9 companions + 3 advisors + 10-15 various little servants and tagalongs was really overdoing it in DAI.
|
|
pinkjellybeans
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 97 Likes: 254
inherit
1360
0
Sept 21, 2017 2:55:08 GMT
254
pinkjellybeans
97
Aug 30, 2016 14:16:12 GMT
August 2016
jellybeans
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pinkjellybeans on Sept 28, 2017 20:44:38 GMT
How many do you think we'd have? Will they scale it back and we're going to end up with, say 6 permanent companions? Will there be romanceable/befriended/plot-important NPCs who are otherwise not our companions, like advisers or characters like Reyes in MEA? Depends a little on how the game is presented. 6 felt like too few in DA2, but was plenty in Awakening. 9 seems like more than enough assuming the game went for a balanced party (but they don't necessarily have to...Origins didn't). That's also with the caveat that I don't think we need a whole bunch of "advisors" and other minor non-party NPCs bloating the cast. 9 companions + 3 advisors + 10-15 various little servants and tagalongs was really overdoing it in DAI. I disagree that 6 felt too few in DA2. I think 6 or 7 is the ideal amount. DA2 had a lot of flaws but when you see people talking about the positives of that game it's usually always the companions and the close relationship they had with each other and with Hawke. It was mostly because they were a small little group and felt more like friends than followers. It also allows the characters to be a lot more connected to the main story and have more content in general. Not to mention that, and this is just wishful thinking from my part, with less companions we could have something resembling the loyalty missions from ME2 and MEA. I always wanted that for DA.
|
|
luketrevelyan
N4
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 1,718 Likes: 5,976
inherit
328
0
5,976
luketrevelyan
1,718
August 2016
luketrevelyan
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by luketrevelyan on Sept 28, 2017 20:51:46 GMT
I like having a lot of companions. With DAI I like that I can ignore some of the companions entirely on different PTs to change things up. Plus I loved the advisors. MEA definitely felt like too few companions and they were all forced on you and could never leave. Please don't do that again.
|
|
formerfiend
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: Former_Fiend
Posts: 547 Likes: 956
inherit
6916
0
956
formerfiend
547
April 2017
formerfiend
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
Former_Fiend
|
Post by formerfiend on Sept 28, 2017 21:14:50 GMT
Honestly I like DAI's nine companions, 3/3/3 class spread. I think that's ideal, that's what we should continue with going forward.
|
|
midnight tea
Twitter Guru
gateway beverage
Posts: 8,040 Likes: 19,684
inherit
gateway beverage
109
0
19,684
midnight tea
8,040
August 2016
midnighttea
|
Post by midnight tea on Sept 28, 2017 21:18:16 GMT
Honestly I like DAI's nine companions, 3/3/3 class spread. I think that's ideal, that's what we should continue with going forward. Hmmm... I wonder how much classes themselves will be designed in DA4. One of the devs sneaking around this forum mentioned something that maaaaybe specializations will be unlocked for all classes...?
|
|
inherit
1331
0
Sept 26, 2024 13:41:26 GMT
1,337
ProbeAway
1,014
August 2016
probeaway
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by ProbeAway on Sept 28, 2017 22:26:35 GMT
Honestly I like DAI's nine companions, 3/3/3 class spread. I think that's ideal, that's what we should continue with going forward. I feel like the number of companions should depend on the context of the story. My two favourite games companion-wise are ME2 and DA2, which are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Lots of companions worked in ME2, DAO and DAI because each game was based around seeking help to achieve your end goal. In other games it has made sense to have a smaller group because you're just kind of collecting friends on your adventure. In that light, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a slightly smaller team in DA4.
|
|
pinkjellybeans
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 97 Likes: 254
inherit
1360
0
Sept 21, 2017 2:55:08 GMT
254
pinkjellybeans
97
Aug 30, 2016 14:16:12 GMT
August 2016
jellybeans
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pinkjellybeans on Sept 28, 2017 23:51:02 GMT
Honestly I like DAI's nine companions, 3/3/3 class spread. I think that's ideal, that's what we should continue with going forward. I feel like the number of companions should depend on the context of the story. My two favourite games companion-wise are ME2 and DA2, which are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Lots of companions worked in ME2, DAO and DAI because each game was based around seeking help to achieve your end goal. In other games it has made sense to have a smaller group because you're just kind of collecting friends on your adventure. In that light, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a slightly smaller team in DA4. I agree with your first sentence, but I think the huge amount of companions in ME2 worked well (and are often people's favorite) because that game is basically all about assembling a team and earning their loyalty. So you get a lot of interactions, missions and whatnot that you probably wouldn't get in any other game if they had that same amount of companions. ME2 sacrificed the main story for it. Recruiting squadmates and doing their missions IS most of the main story actually, which a lot of people are fine with, but I feel like ME2 was one of its kind. While I do value companions and the interactions you have with them, I don't think sacrificing a main storyline for it is worth it. And when you have a high amount of companions in any game that isn't ME2, resources will probably lack in other departments (for example DAI lacked on the sidequest department, I doubt it was a design decision to have nothing but fetch quests on the maps, it was clearly lack of resources/time). Some people also complained that there weren't enough romance scenes in DAI, others wanted more meaningful interactions in general, others wanted more character development, but the truth is, you can't have both quality and quantity, it seems, and I'd rather have quality any day of the week, which is why I'm fine with less companions if that means there will be more resources to make them more like ME2's squadmates but without sacrificing anything elsewhere. Also, DAO didn't have that many companions. Excluding Dog (he's a dog, he doesn't have or need the same amount of content of the other companions) and Shale (DLC), there were 7 companions. I actually think DAO fit in the "collecting friends on your adventure" category. At first it was supposed to be just the warden and Alistair (and well, Morrigan) to gather the allies to fight the Blight, but throughout their journey they stumble upon these people who join their little group. As opposed to ME2 where you literally recruit the companions to join your fight and in DAI where most of them just show up at your doorstep and say "Hey, I want to join because reasons!".
|
|
inherit
401
0
1
43,517
DragonKingReborn
21,207
August 2016
dragonkingreborn
http://bsn.boards.net/threads/recent/143
https://i.imgur.com/1myVt9D.jpg
DragonKingReborn
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
887
590
|
Post by DragonKingReborn on Sept 29, 2017 0:18:10 GMT
Honestly I like DAI's nine companions, 3/3/3 class spread. I think that's ideal, that's what we should continue with going forward. I feel like the number of companions should depend on the context of the story. My two favourite games companion-wise are ME2 and DA2, which are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Lots of companions worked in ME2, DAO and DAI because each game was based around seeking help to achieve your end goal. In other games it has made sense to have a smaller group because you're just kind of collecting friends on your adventure. In that light, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a slightly smaller team in DA4. I tend to agree. While I really liked the ability to roll a single class party in Inquisition (4 rogues or 4 mages or 4 warriors) if a player was so inclined, if I was forced to choose between that ability and more content for each follower that we did get (and from what we know of game development, we are certainly forced to make that choice) then I choose fewer followers that each have more content than an individual follower in Origins or Inquisition. Not that I felt either of those games was light on follower content, but more is - usually, though not always - better. Mostly because the follower content seems to get a bit more 'love and attention' than other side content, which is fine by me. But further than that, it makes sense for DA4 - assuming it is the general storyline of chasing down Solas that many here speculate - to have a smaller team than Inquisition. Inquisition was a vast organisation that needed lots of people. If you're tasked with hunting down an enemy good at hiding his tracks and vastly more powerful than you, I imagine you'll want to keep the inner circle fairly tight.
|
|
inherit
1587
0
1,772
Walter Black
1,289
Sept 15, 2016 15:02:16 GMT
September 2016
walterblack
|
Post by Walter Black on Sept 29, 2017 1:13:25 GMT
Honestly I like DAI's nine companions, 3/3/3 class spread. I think that's ideal, that's what we should continue with going forward. I feel like the number of companions should depend on the context of the story. My two favourite games companion-wise are ME2 and DA2, which are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Lots of companions worked in ME2, DAO and DAI because each game was based around seeking help to achieve your end goal. In other games it has made sense to have a smaller group because you're just kind of collecting friends on your adventure. In that light, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a slightly smaller team in DA4. There was a time I would have wanted as many Companions as possible, for varieties' sake, but now I'm not so sure. My favorite types Companions have many story hooks and character directions in which they could be completely different people across multiple runs. The more Companions you have, the less chances we have of unlocking alternate selves. Not just in the Companion's own personality, but how they react to us and different scenarios.
Looking back I think this is one of the things I disliked about the Advisors. Yes, they had character arcs, but from a strategic standpoint none of them really did anything that our Party couldn't do. Take Cullen for example; I liked his story, but Cassandra was a Seeker, the Hero of Orlais and the Right Hand of the Divine. By all rights she should have been leading the Inquisition's armies, but the writers gave to the job to a glorified prison guard because fanservice. Varric, Solas, Sera, Iron Bull and even Cole could have contributed to spy efforts, where Varric, Cass (again, I like characters who can multitask) and Vivienne could have helped with economic and noble alliances. "But I don't like that character!" you say? Then kick them, look for alternatives, or suffer. The fact that the Advisors had no Approval meters and would stay no matter what often strikes me as dev handholding more than anything. Look, I liked Cullen, Leliana and Josephine, but from a gameplay standpoint they often struck me as redundant. This is less knocks on their characters, and more a hope that Bioware consolidates Advisor functions into the Companions in DA4.
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
31,555
Hanako Ikezawa
22,979
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Sept 29, 2017 1:29:30 GMT
I feel like the number of companions should depend on the context of the story. My two favourite games companion-wise are ME2 and DA2, which are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Lots of companions worked in ME2, DAO and DAI because each game was based around seeking help to achieve your end goal. In other games it has made sense to have a smaller group because you're just kind of collecting friends on your adventure. In that light, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a slightly smaller team in DA4. There was a time I would have wanted as many Companions as possible, for varieties' sake, but now I'm not so sure. My favorite types Companions have many story hooks and character directions in which they could be completely different people across multiple runs. The more Companions you have, the less chances we have of unlocking alternate selves. Not just in the Companion's own personality, but how they react to us and different scenarios.
Looking back I think this is one of the things I disliked about the Advisors. Yes, they had character arcs, but from a strategic standpoint none of them really did anything that our Party couldn't do. Take Cullen for example; I liked his story, but Cassandra was a Seeker, the Hero of Orlais and the Right Hand of the Divine. By all rights she should have been leading the Inquisition's armies, but the writers gave to the job to a glorified prison guard because fanservice. Varric, Solas, Sera, Iron Bull and even Cole could have contributed to spy efforts, where Varric, Cass (again, I like characters who can multitask) and Vivienne could have helped with economic and noble alliances. "But I don't like that character!" you say? Then kick them, look for alternatives, or suffer. The fact that the Advisors had no Approval meters and would stay no matter what often strikes me as dev handholding more than anything. Look, I liked Cullen, Leliana and Josephine, but from a gameplay standpoint they often struck me as redundant. This is less knocks on their characters, and more a hope that Bioware consolidates Advisor functions into the Companions in DA4.
I hope they don't consolidate advisor functions into companions in future games. Having members of your group be integral but not squadmates leads to a lot of fun characters and stories that you couldn't do if they were companions. I love that in DA and in ME. For example there is Josephine who is a character who prefers to solve things through words and not violence to the point she is a pacifist. Having a pacifist character in the main group was extremely interesting, and would never have worked if a companion since then they'd be devastating armies worth of people.
|
|
formerfiend
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: Former_Fiend
Posts: 547 Likes: 956
inherit
6916
0
956
formerfiend
547
April 2017
formerfiend
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
Former_Fiend
|
Post by formerfiend on Sept 29, 2017 2:23:32 GMT
My issue is that I don't want us to be doing something that requires "advisors" in the same way we had them in Inquisition. I think they were necessary in that game - I disagree that Cassandra could both be leading the Inquisition's armies and running around with us in the field - partly for time considerations(seriously we have to be spending months travelling back and forth from Skyhold) and partly because by her own admission, Cassandra's kind of a shit leader.
But I don't want to be the head of a major organization again and therefore I don't want to be in a position where I need to delegate tasks to other people in the same way that the Inquisitor had to.
Which isn't to say that I'm not in favor of there being major NPC's who can also function as love interests. I am in favor of non-party member LI's because I think that's something that just increases the stories you can tell.
I just don't want us to be in that same position again.
|
|
inherit
1331
0
Sept 26, 2024 13:41:26 GMT
1,337
ProbeAway
1,014
August 2016
probeaway
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by ProbeAway on Sept 29, 2017 4:17:16 GMT
I feel like the number of companions should depend on the context of the story. My two favourite games companion-wise are ME2 and DA2, which are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Lots of companions worked in ME2, DAO and DAI because each game was based around seeking help to achieve your end goal. In other games it has made sense to have a smaller group because you're just kind of collecting friends on your adventure. In that light, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a slightly smaller team in DA4. I agree with your first sentence, but I think the huge amount of companions in ME2 worked well (and are often people's favorite) because that game is basically all about assembling a team and earning their loyalty. So you get a lot of interactions, missions and whatnot that you probably wouldn't get in any other game if they had that same amount of companions. ME2 sacrificed the main story for it. Recruiting squadmates and doing their missions IS most of the main story actually, which a lot of people are fine with, but I feel like ME2 was one of its kind. While I do value companions and the interactions you have with them, I don't think sacrificing a main storyline for it is worth it. And when you have a high amount of companions in any game that isn't ME2, resources will probably lack in other departments (for example DAI lacked on the sidequest department, I doubt it was a design decision to have nothing but fetch quests on the maps, it was clearly lack of resources/time). Some people also complained that there weren't enough romance scenes in DAI, others wanted more meaningful interactions in general, others wanted more character development, but the truth is, you can't have both quality and quantity, it seems, and I'd rather have quality any day of the week, which is why I'm fine with less companions if that means there will be more resources to make them more like ME2's squadmates but without sacrificing anything elsewhere. Also, DAO didn't have that many companions. Excluding Dog (he's a dog, he doesn't have or need the same amount of content of the other companions) and Shale (DLC), there were 7 companions. I actually think DAO fit in the "collecting friends on your adventure" category. At first it was supposed to be just the warden and Alistair (and well, Morrigan) to gather the allies to fight the Blight, but throughout their journey they stumble upon these people who join their little group. As opposed to ME2 where you literally recruit the companions to join your fight and in DAI where most of them just show up at your doorstep and say "Hey, I want to join because reasons!". I should have worded that better. When I said that having lots of companions worked, what I meant was that it made sense. It was intended to be a comment about how the number of companions bore some correlation to the context of the game, not about the quality of companion content. You're right that DAO was a bad example, given the way you acquire your companions (although I definitely count dog - he's my fur bro).
|
|
inherit
2147
0
2,921
Gwydden
1,318
November 2016
gwydden
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
|
Post by Gwydden on Sept 29, 2017 20:48:08 GMT
We've always sort of gotten nine. DA:O had nine plus a "secret" companion i.e. Loghain. DA2 and DA:I had three for each class. So I expect we'll get nine again. Though, I remember one of the devs, I think Laidlaw, saying they might consider adding more classes to a future game. That might fudge things a bit, if it comes to pass.
Myself, I think less is more. The fewer companions there are, the more content each will get. Same goes for love interests, while we're at it.
|
|
pinkjellybeans
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 97 Likes: 254
inherit
1360
0
Sept 21, 2017 2:55:08 GMT
254
pinkjellybeans
97
Aug 30, 2016 14:16:12 GMT
August 2016
jellybeans
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pinkjellybeans on Sept 30, 2017 10:19:50 GMT
The reason why I also want there to be fewer companions is because I REALLY want them to have an unique class again that is related to their own background and story. It added a lot more complexity to them and it made combat more interesting and diverse. I was really annoyed that Cassandra had a Templar ability even though she says more than once that Seekers aren't templars. I mean, where is her badass Seeker skill that she talked about? And I was sad that Varric didn't have his special class for Bianca anymore. When the Inquisitor chooses their own specialization and there's someone in your party that has it, it just makes things boring. For example, if I'm a tempest archer then it makes no sense to have Sera in my party anymore because she doesn't bring anything new to combat.
|
|
N7Valentine
N2
We'll bang, ok?
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 106 Likes: 222
inherit
9304
0
222
N7Valentine
We'll bang, ok?
106
Sept 5, 2017 18:54:54 GMT
September 2017
n7valentine
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by N7Valentine on Sept 30, 2017 11:32:08 GMT
The amount of companions depends on the story of the game. In games like ME2 or DAI many companions made sense as it was about to stop the big bad. In more intimate and personal sories a small amount makes sense. It'll be determined by how the story of the next DA plays
|
|
midnight tea
Twitter Guru
gateway beverage
Posts: 8,040 Likes: 19,684
inherit
gateway beverage
109
0
19,684
midnight tea
8,040
August 2016
midnighttea
|
Post by midnight tea on Sept 30, 2017 11:37:16 GMT
The reason why I also want there to be fewer companions is because I REALLY want them to have an unique class again that is related to their own background and story. It added a lot more complexity to them and it made combat more interesting and diverse. I was really annoyed that Cassandra had a Templar ability even though she says more than once that Seekers aren't templars. I mean, where is her badass Seeker skill that she talked about? And I was sad that Varric didn't have his special class for Bianca anymore. When the Inquisitor chooses their own specialization and there's someone in your party that has it, it just makes things boring. For example, if I'm a tempest archer then it makes no sense to have Sera in my party anymore because she doesn't bring anything new to combat. Sekeers aren't Templars, but the difference ain't in abilities, but in fact that Seekers don't need lyrium. Also - I'm not sure what's the problem with two party members of the same class - just use different skills an set them up differently to add something new.
|
|
pinkjellybeans
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 97 Likes: 254
inherit
1360
0
Sept 21, 2017 2:55:08 GMT
254
pinkjellybeans
97
Aug 30, 2016 14:16:12 GMT
August 2016
jellybeans
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pinkjellybeans on Sept 30, 2017 11:58:43 GMT
The reason why I also want there to be fewer companions is because I REALLY want them to have an unique class again that is related to their own background and story. It added a lot more complexity to them and it made combat more interesting and diverse. I was really annoyed that Cassandra had a Templar ability even though she says more than once that Seekers aren't templars. I mean, where is her badass Seeker skill that she talked about? And I was sad that Varric didn't have his special class for Bianca anymore. When the Inquisitor chooses their own specialization and there's someone in your party that has it, it just makes things boring. For example, if I'm a tempest archer then it makes no sense to have Sera in my party anymore because she doesn't bring anything new to combat. Sekeers aren't Templars, but the difference ain't in abilities, but in fact that Seekers don't need lyrium. Also - I'm not sure what's the problem with two party members of the same class - just use different skills an set them up differently to add something new. Still, Cassandra had a special Seeker ability that she never uses in combat because her class is the typical templar class. Cassandra is the type of companion that would benefit from having an unique specialization. I mean, sure, you can choose different abilities for them in the end, but then specializations are nothing special, they start to feel like any other class. I don't see why anyone would oppose to the idea of companions having their own specialization, when the whole point is to add more diversity to combat and a more unique feel to the companions.
|
|
midnight tea
Twitter Guru
gateway beverage
Posts: 8,040 Likes: 19,684
inherit
gateway beverage
109
0
19,684
midnight tea
8,040
August 2016
midnighttea
|
Post by midnight tea on Sept 30, 2017 12:23:24 GMT
Sekeers aren't Templars, but the difference ain't in abilities, but in fact that Seekers don't need lyrium. Also - I'm not sure what's the problem with two party members of the same class - just use different skills an set them up differently to add something new. Still, Cassandra had a special Seeker ability that she never uses in combat because her class is the typical templar class. Cassandra is the type of companion that would benefit from having an unique specialization. I mean, sure, you can choose different abilities for them in the end, but then specializations are nothing special, they start to feel like any other class. I don't see why anyone would oppose to the idea of companions having their own specialization, when the whole point is to add more diversity to combat and a more unique feel to the companions. The abilities she mentioned are very specific and affecting a narrow range of enemies (like mages), so they're unlikely to have been tailored into a combat ability anyhow. And I'm not opposing the idea of companions having own specialization, but I disagree with idea that 'specializations are nothing special' if you choose different abilities... specializations abilities and passives will still synergize differently with different abilities - or weapons. Dual-wield Tempest for example is probably my fav spec to play, aside from Rift Mage.
|
|
pinkjellybeans
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 97 Likes: 254
inherit
1360
0
Sept 21, 2017 2:55:08 GMT
254
pinkjellybeans
97
Aug 30, 2016 14:16:12 GMT
August 2016
jellybeans
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pinkjellybeans on Sept 30, 2017 13:45:28 GMT
Still, Cassandra had a special Seeker ability that she never uses in combat because her class is the typical templar class. Cassandra is the type of companion that would benefit from having an unique specialization. I mean, sure, you can choose different abilities for them in the end, but then specializations are nothing special, they start to feel like any other class. I don't see why anyone would oppose to the idea of companions having their own specialization, when the whole point is to add more diversity to combat and a more unique feel to the companions. The abilities she mentioned are very specific and affecting a narrow range of enemies (like mages), so they're unlikely to have been tailored into a combat ability anyhow. And I'm not opposing the idea of companions having own specialization, but I disagree with idea that 'specializations are nothing special' if you choose different abilities... specializations abilities and passives will still synergize differently with different abilities - or weapons. Dual-wield Tempest for example is probably my fav spec to play, aside from Rift Mage. I don't see how that is a problem. I'm sure Bioware could come up with other skills and passives that are unique to Cassandra's history and personality to make a Seeker class worth it. That's the whole point of companions having an unique specialization, basically bring a bit of their story into combat. At least that's how I see it. I get what you mean but what if I want to be a tempest archer? Then I will feel the need to change Sera's skills to maybe a duel wield or not give her the tempest skills at all in the hopes of making combat less repetitive when I bring her along. And that to me is changing who she is (Sera as a dual wield is just weird) and if you look at specializations and think that maybe you're not going to use them on the companions because you want to use them yourself then it means they aren't unique enough to be considered as a "must have" thing. Why make such a big deal about specializations then? (that you even have to have teachers and do annoying quests to unlock it) Not sure if I'm getting my point across. In the end, all I'm asking for is more diversity.
|
|
midnight tea
Twitter Guru
gateway beverage
Posts: 8,040 Likes: 19,684
inherit
gateway beverage
109
0
19,684
midnight tea
8,040
August 2016
midnighttea
|
Post by midnight tea on Sept 30, 2017 14:16:03 GMT
The abilities she mentioned are very specific and affecting a narrow range of enemies (like mages), so they're unlikely to have been tailored into a combat ability anyhow. And I'm not opposing the idea of companions having own specialization, but I disagree with idea that 'specializations are nothing special' if you choose different abilities... specializations abilities and passives will still synergize differently with different abilities - or weapons. Dual-wield Tempest for example is probably my fav spec to play, aside from Rift Mage. I don't see how that is a problem. I'm sure Bioware could come up with other skills and passives that are unique to Cassandra's history and personality to make a Seeker class worth it. That's the whole point of companions having an unique specialization, basically bring a bit of their story into combat. At least that's how I see it. Well the problem is designing a completely different combat system from what we have. Still, I'm not saying that I wouldn't enjoy seeing specs crafted specifically for characters, I'm only saying that Cassandra hasn't been given a skill tree that ain't what she does or can do. All her Templaresque abilities are still abilities she has and the fact that Seekers can use those without lyrium is actually relevant to the story. I've only given dual wield as an example - you can still have two tempest archers and switch up abilities so the two can synergize well on the field. Add a few buffs and debuffs or unlock Sera's poison skills and passives, of spec her more into aoe damage instead of single-target. Or give Sera invisibility, make her follow and target player targets and let her snipe for massive damage. There are enough skills and passives for us to create diverse tactics and setups.
|
|
mattjamho
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 253 Likes: 574
inherit
826
0
574
mattjamho
253
August 2016
matth
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by mattjamho on Sept 30, 2017 15:43:56 GMT
Companions should definitely have different specializations again, even if it's just a unique ability. Solas, for example, has Rift mage. Instead of Firestorm (which should be in the damn Inferno tree but that is a whole other conversation) perhaps he could have had an ability that puts enemies to sleep, called Fade Dream or something better. Not only does it vary combat, but it makes the companion feel more unique and fits with their character. Cassandra could have had her mage blood skill, Varric could have had Bianca's Song etc.
Having said that, I really would prefer them in DA4 to follow what they did in DA2 when it comes to companion specializations; unique to the companion, but similar to the PCs specialization.
|
|
inherit
ღ I am a golem. Obviously.
440
0
24,454
phoray
Dreadnaw Rising
12,650
August 2016
phoray
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by phoray on Sept 30, 2017 15:55:24 GMT
Still, Cassandra had a special Seeker ability that she never uses in combat because her class is the typical templar class. Cassandra is the type of companion that would benefit from having an unique specialization. I agree with you, but for a different reason. Fenris has skills that tapped into the lyrium embedded in his skin. DA2 Varric had crossbow abilities that tied into the tale of why Bianca is so special. Anders had combat skills that tied into his being an abomination. Merril had Keeper Spells as well as blood magic spells I believe that were specific to her. It wasn't about battle for me. It was about these people being unique individuals with battle skills that tied directly into their history, their story, their character. And even if I didn't find their skills useful or synergistic to my own combat choices, it was cool that their character history carried so strongly into their combat style. As it would in real life if we were in a world where fighting every day and magic were a thing. By giving Cassandra the same skills as a Templar, it made her just as Rank and File as any of the Templars we fought and interacted with. Just like being a Champion spec made me think I'd just be like any Orlesian soldier of any skill. The Seekers abilities, as described from Cassandra, seemed to be a crazy form of anti magic magic and what we got was a LAdy that said she had similar abilities, but instead it ws like... Ser Barris or Cullen had joined the group.
|
|
pinkjellybeans
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 97 Likes: 254
inherit
1360
0
Sept 21, 2017 2:55:08 GMT
254
pinkjellybeans
97
Aug 30, 2016 14:16:12 GMT
August 2016
jellybeans
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pinkjellybeans on Sept 30, 2017 18:53:00 GMT
Still, Cassandra had a special Seeker ability that she never uses in combat because her class is the typical templar class. Cassandra is the type of companion that would benefit from having an unique specialization. I agree with you, but for a different reason. Fenris has skills that tapped into the lyrium embedded in his skin. DA2 Varric had crossbow abilities that tied into the tale of why Bianca is so special. Anders had combat skills that tied into his being an abomination. Merril had Keeper Spells as well as blood magic spells I believe that were specific to her. It wasn't about battle for me. It was about these people being unique individuals with battle skills that tied directly into their history, their story, their character. And even if I didn't find their skills useful or synergistic to my own combat choices, it was cool that their character history carried so strongly into their combat style. As it would in real life if we were in a world where fighting every day and magic were a thing. By giving Cassandra the same skills as a Templar, it made her just as Rank and File as any of the Templars we fought and interacted with. Just like being a Champion spec made me think I'd just be like any Orlesian soldier of any skill. The Seekers abilities, as described from Cassandra, seemed to be a crazy form of anti magic magic and what we got was a LAdy that said she had similar abilities, but instead it ws like... Ser Barris or Cullen had joined the group. Actually, that's how I see it too. It's not just about making combat more diverse and fun. Like I said above, "I'm sure Bioware could come up with other skills and passives that are unique to Cassandra's history and personality to make a Seeker class worth it. That's the whole point of companions having an unique specialization, basically bring a bit of their story into combat. At least that's how I see it." It adds this layer of depth to the characters and just makes them stand out more, if that makes sense. Like you said, some of the skills in DA2 weren't completely useful and an absolute must have, but I still loved that they were so unique and reflected each companion's background and personality.
|
|
formerfiend
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: Former_Fiend
Posts: 547 Likes: 956
inherit
6916
0
956
formerfiend
547
April 2017
formerfiend
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
Former_Fiend
|
Post by formerfiend on Sept 30, 2017 22:43:57 GMT
I was a proponent of each of the companions having one of the specializations available to the player for that class back when the 3/3/3 configuration was first announced. But that was under the assumption that they'd be the ones teaching us the specialization like how it was for some of them in Origins, where Leliana taught you how to be a bard, Alistair taught you how to be a templar, Morrigan taught you how to be a shapeshifter, etc.
Not only was that not the case, but they tried to weasel their way around it with several of the companions not actually being their specialization; Cassandra isn't actually a templar, she can just do similar things without the lyrium - in direct contradiction to her own dialogue. Bull isn't a reaver, he just does the same things due to some innate qunari dragon business that he isn't wholly aware of and also isn't available to a qunari inquisitor. Cole isn't really an assassin, he just uses his spirit powers to the same effect.
So they wanted to do the thing like they did with the DA2 characters where some of them had existing specializations, just with their own spin on them, except they didn't want to actually give them anything unique. They just gave them the same powers and told us it was different, just not in any functional, practical way.
|
|